MANAWA — Growing cover crops and managed rotational grazing of dairy and beef cattle are becoming increasingly important to success on many Wisconsin farms.
Cover crops increase soil organic matter, and improve soil fertility by capturing excess nutrients after a crop is harvested. Grazing also raises soil moisture holding capacity, helps prevent soil erosion, limits nutrient runoff, reduces soil compaction, and can even help suppress some pests.
Wepner Farms, a diversified dairy and beef operation in East Central Waupaca County, is currently testing the benefits of grazing beef cattle on cover crops. But farm owners, Jeff Wepner and his son, Alex, have added a virtual fence component to their cover-crop grazing.
Planting a cover crop and extending grazing season
With cropping 1,500 acres, milking 350 cows in a six-unit robotic milking system and raising beef steers, moving interior fencing for grazing cattle on a daily basis was problematic.
So, the Wepner’s sought help from Derrick Raspor, Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) field coordinator, when they were considering grazing cover crops, and he assisted in arranging a virtual fencing system.
“We harvested a wheat field in August, and then I planted the cover crop,” said Jeff. “I planted radishes, rape, rye, clover and a mixture of other seed I had on hand just to see what would grow.”
The cover crop grew so much that the cattle were barely visible except when they were standing. The cover crop also has significantly extended the grazing season.
Next spring the Wepners plan to plant into what remains of the cover crop.
“We’ll plant into the cover crop and then spray to terminate what is left,” explained Jeff. “A lot of the plants will winter kill, but the clover and cereal rye should come back.”
Adding the cows and keeping track of them with e-collars
Less than a month ago, 10 cows were turned out to graze the cover crop in a 10-acre paddock enclosed by virtual fencing that Raspor had helped them obtain and set up.
“We’re running a beef cross, breeding a percentage of our Holsteins to Angus because we raise steers for beef,” said Jeff. “Those out here on the cover crop are heifers, because I’m trying to get them bred back to get Angus cows.”
Recently, about three dozen area farmers and others turned out for a pasture walk, sponsored by NRCS and Golden Sands Resources and Development Council to learn about the effectiveness of the virtual fence.
Jeff Wepner, left, and his son, Alex, are testing the use of a virtual fence system on grazing cover crops. Photo by: Dan Hansen/Special to Wisconsin State Farmer
Virtual fence provides increased efficiency, minimal impact
A Norwegian company called Nofence is one of the first companies to make this fence available to ranchers in the United States. There are several other systems also piloting their products, including Vence, eShepherd and Corral Technologies.
The Wepner’s virtual fence uses Gallagher’s eShepherd cattle collars that provide coverage wherever cell phone service works, removing the need for expensive start-up infrastructure with connectivity base stations.
Derrick Raspor said the eShepherd™ is a solar-powered, GPS enabled, livestock collar, that allows farmers to simply draw a virtual fence anywhere on their property and the cattle learn to move with and remain within the virtual barrier.
“Every cow has a collar,” said Jeff Wepner. “We set the boundaries of the paddock with a cell phone, a satellite tracks movements of the cattle through their collars, and communicates the signal of fence boundaries to the collars.”
The collars send specific signals to the animals as they approach the established fence boundaries.
“When a cow gets within 10 feet of the virtual fence, the collar will transmit a tone to the animal, and if it goes closer, the cow will get a shock that’s about the same as a regular electric fence,” Jeff said. “There’s no shock if an animal returns to the fence to rejoin the herd.”
Virtual fencing benefits and challenges
Raspor stressed that virtual fencing is an emerging technology that promises to help farmers design pasture boundaries specific to the management goals of their grazing plan.
“Many virtual fencing designs use drinking water locations as an overlapping area to avoid having to invest in additional infrastructure, saving money and labor time,” he said. “Minimal time is typically required to move cattle and check fences, as it is all done through the software.”
Wepner said that most of his animals quickly learned the boundaries of the virtual fence.
“Nine of our 10 heifers learned right away to stay inside the fence,” he said.
While the $300 initial cost of the collars and monthly fee could cause some to hesitate to install the system, Raspor says this cost is largely offset by saving the cost of constructing physical fencing.
“Virtual fencing also reduces the labor cost of moving interior fencing and overcomes topographic barriers and allows more efficiency by grazing areas not easily fenced,” Raspor said.
Among the challenges of virtual fencing is the producer needs to learn the software and how to set up paddocks, exclusions, and identify animals. Another challenge is the time needed to collar all the livestock that need to be virtually fenced, which could be considerable with a larger herd.
Producers must also take into account the potential failure rate of the collars, and their reliability and dependability in wooded areas and during colder temperatures.
“We’re hoping to answer these and other questions as we get more of these collars to producers over the 12 months,” said Raspor. “We’re also working to provide future financial incentives for producers looking to utilize this technology.”
Ultimately, virtual fencing has the potential to increase operating efficiency while creating positive impacts on the landscape.
Post a comment
Report Abusive Comment